Memory Beta:Pages for deletion/Doctor Who/pre-release
This is a page to discuss the suggestion to delete " ". *If you are suggesting a page for deletion, add your initial rationale to the section "Deletion rationale". *To vote simply add "Delete", "Keep", "Neutral". *If you want to discuss this suggestion, add comments to the section "Discussion". *If a consensus has been reached, an admin will explain the final decision in the section "Admin resolution". In all cases, please make sure to read and understand the deletion policy before editing this page. Deletion rationale the previous precedent is established at Memory Beta:Pages for deletion/Buffy the Vampire Slayer... unrelated franchise, deleted by vote. -- Captain MKB 23:34, March 1, 2012 (UTC) Votes *''delete'' -- Captain MKB 23:34, March 1, 2012 (UTC) *''KEEP'' -- BadCatMan 01:56, March 2, 2012 (UTC) *''keep'' -- --Captain riggs 19:26, March 26, 2012 (UTC) *''Keep'' The appearance of what is unambiguously meant to be an episode of Doctor Who in My Enemy, My Ally should be justification enough for this page's existence. —Josiah Rowe 02:54, April 25, 2012 (UTC) Discussion No Star Trek source mentions the Doctor Who series, and we simply have no precedent for creating pages for other scifi franchises, regardless of their involvement or lack of involvement in Star Trek, whether in mention or crossover. In previous discussion, consensus supported deletion of Buffy the Vampire Slayer - as there was no connection to Star Trek. This is a Star Trek wiki, and even though we have seen ST crossover with the DC Legion and Marvel's X-Men, we have no DC Universe page, nor any Marvel universe page. -- Captain MKB 23:32, March 1, 2012 (UTC) ::I'm not convinced to vote for a delete just yet. A quick search for X-Men on MB brought up a category and pages for the X-Men characters. I also see a page describing the Legion of Super-Heroes and its members as well. Knowing that we have a Doctor Who/Star Trek crossover coming up soon would create a need for a character page with some reference history? Perhaps renaming the page from "Doctor Who" to "The Doctor (Doctor Who)" instead of deletion?--TardisCaptain 23:45, March 1, 2012 (UTC) :I'm glad you asked about this - we have pages and categories for the X-Men - as they were presented (from a point-of-view "in" the Star Trek universe) as characters... but we maintain those as our references. We don't have a separate page for the X-Men franchise or the Marvel franchise universe in general. When the DW crossover series comes out, we will have the Doctor (Time Lord) articles, as well as TARDIS articles, and probably Gallifrey, etc... but we remain "in" the point-of-view of them as characters and locations and vehicles -- we don't have articles for the TV series or franchises they comes from. See what I mean? if we did, the amount of "non-Star Trek" material on our wiki might become unmanageable. The DC Comics Universe and Marvel crossovers can be well fleshed out without creating unnecessary articles about their TV series or publication franchises. This would be a "new kind of article" that I can't see justification for... -- Captain MKB 23:52, March 1, 2012 (UTC) Is there any particular reason Memory Beta can't establish short, just-the-basics "real world POV" articles for Doctor Who, The Legion of Super-Heroes, X-Men, etc.? Something that would just let the reader know what those franchises are, and provide a link to a fuller Wikipedia article? -- Sci 23:57 1 MAR 2012 UTC :Thanks for joining the discussion, Sci! :To answer: Sure, if we establish a consensus of users to create a "new" type of real-world article based on these two (not yet three, until DW/TNG is released) occurrences of interfranchise x-overs. We'd have to establish a procedure for inclusion -- re: only using those franchises that have "actually" crossed over, and excluding those that haven't been part of licensed crossovers. This would mean maintaining the precedent of excluding "implied" crossovers like Buffy, X-Files or Stargate, where authors have included sly references but not explicitly stated a crossover occurred. This would be in keeping with our fan fiction policy -- after all, the owners of Buffy, X-Files and SG-1 have never consented to having a licensed crossover. :I'd consider the resolution of this discussion to be such a consensus -- but with that said ''the TNG/DW crossover is UNRELEASED MATERIAL and will not be VALID MATERIAL until the damn thing is released :P '' -- Captain MKB 00:05, March 2, 2012 (UTC) ::Thank you for welcoming me to the discussion. I think it's perfectly reasonable to say that any Real World POV articles Memory Beta establishes for the crossed-over franchises should be restricted only to official, licensed crossovers -- so, yes for X-Men or Legion of Super-Heroes, no for Pretty Maids All in a Row or whatnot. I think we might run into an interesting question with the "Zombies" crossover event IDW did a while ago -- I haven't read it, so I don't know if it was enough of a crossover to necessitate creating articles for the other series that did the "Zombie" thing. ::As for Doctor Who -- I don't see why the "no info until publication" rule would apply to a Real World POV article. If they announce tomorrow that some famous author -- say, J.K. Rowling -- is going to write a new Star Trek novel, would we also need to wait until its publication before establishing a Real World POV article for Rowling? It's fair to say that we shouldn't establish any articles on the Doctor or Amy Pond or the Cybermen until the crossover is published, but we know that it will be published. It's been announced by the BBC, CBS, and IDW. If I understand things, the "no data until publication" rule is there because it's only upon publication that a new factoid can be said to be part of the fictional Star Trek Universe -- but if it's a real-world POV, I don't see why that rule would or should apply. -- Sci 00:14 2 MAR 2012 UTC :I would say the authors shouldn't be attributed in advance, just as the characters shouldn't. After all, authors can be fired and have their material rewritten at the extreme last minute (ever read Music of the Spheres?), which would make our advance notice incorrect. I feel like I was somewhat lenient as an admin, in allowing the Assimilation² material to be wikified so early on, and now i am paying for it - there has been some pretty wild, disallowable stuff added to the Doctor Who article! :Even if we decide to "promote" the DC Universe, Marvel Universe and Doctor Who as "realworld" articles as hubs of data, its too soon for Doctor Who! It will be deleted (as a candidate for immediate deletion) and restored on the Wednesday in May when the comic is released. After that, pending this discussion, we can maintain the article -- but with valid material guidelines in place. -- Captain MKB 00:22, March 2, 2012 (UTC) ::I really don't see what the point of deleting an entry for Doctor Who and then restoring it in two months would be. Nor do I see the point of disallowing real-world info that's been announced for future releases. -- Sci 00:24 2 MAR 2012 :Thank you again -- that's a super point differentiating the real-world and in-universe aspects. Certainly "in-universe" has never been allowable before release (remember Star Trek 2009 and the frenzy?) but "real world" might justify this. I've already had to "pages for immediate deletion" the Doctor (Time Lord) because it was created in advance of the publication. :We can discuss the pros and cons of the realword aspect of this (after all, the paper is probably being printed now, or has already). I've never been the admin on point for upcoming releases so i can't speak as greatly to this point as the in universe aspect.... but (i'm only somewhat contradicting your point...) releases can and have been cancelled before and we have had to regroup and change our articles to reflect a cancelled publication, so don't discount that possibility, although unlikely :just to follow up on what you said before about Infestation, the creators were verrrry careful to make sure no crossover occurred -- Admiral Kirk never got face to face with the IDW characters, or Optimus Prime, or Peter Venkman, or Cobra Commander. They went out of their way to make sure the Star Trek issues involved got no residue of Transformers or GI Joe or Ghostbusters smeared into them. The crossover itself was just a series of vignettes reprinted from each individual participating series, with IDW characters preceding or succeeding those events. -- Captain MKB 00:33, March 2, 2012 (UTC) The Doctor Who as in-universe entertainment appeared very explicitly, absolutely unquestionably Doctor Who, with a very minor historical alteration. As in-universe reality, its characters and items have appeared in very obvious ways, backed up by clear authorial intent. Only names are missing (for now). This lack hasn't stopped us from using, say, astronomical information for the various names of stars that receive one name but not all. Or do we want to have something clumsy like Unnamed 20th century entertainment#That thing with the police public call box? I haven't seen the Buffy the Vampire Page page, but it seems to have been based one tenuous connection. It's two deletion votes and no discussion are not sufficient precedent or consensus. This page is a bigger, different, and more solidly detailed matter. I'm not proposing this for everything that gets a name-drop or in-joke, only for things that have a significant number of references, as here. We already have precedent in Star Trek within Star Trek as a real-world page that details a list of references to some real-world unnamed 20th century entertainment within canon and licensed Star Trek sources. The Doctor Who page is also its own precedent: its been here for 6 years and had a dozen editors, and passed unremarked, even added to, all that time. Memory Alpha, our big sister wiki, who's example we follow, already has a hugely detailed page. Other wikias do similar pages, the only difference being that their authors are freer with pop culture references: the TARDIS Index File has three such pages for Star Trek alone — Star Trek, Star Trek: The Next Generation and Star Trek (franchise); while the Stargate wikia has a Star Trek page as well. Memory Beta needs to catch up and should adapt and evolve to follow good trends like these. Pages such as this one are very useful. It collects all these odd references in one place rather than being scattered across the wiki. As soon as Assimilation² was announced, fans on forums were wondering about the connections between Doctor Who and Star Trek. I directed them here. If someone heard about some old Star Trek novel where Doctor Who was watched or the Doctor made a cameo appearance, they can come straight here to find out about it, and then maybe even read it. They should be able to do the same with The X-Men and the Legion of Super-Heroes. So it's useful, fun, and of interest to other fandoms, fans of both franchises, and even authors looking to make such references or write cross-overs. It helps this wiki build connections with other wikis and franchises, rather than existing in isolation. And we'll need these pages again in two months time, making the whole activity rather pointless. -- BadCatMan 01:57, March 2, 2012 (UTC) This brings me to a question. My current Memory Beta project has been getting the details from the TNG novel The Forgotten War documented. In the novel several characters were referencing the play Tamburlaine the Great by Marlowe. I was planning to add at least a short entry for each as how they were referenced in the book and a link to the Wikipedia pages for those wishing to know more. Wouldn't the same references to the Doctor Who character as they appeared in licensed Star Trek works be documented in the same manner? --TardisCaptain 03:41, March 2, 2012 (UTC) ::The topic of the page's content is quite a separate discussion -- the inclusion policy regarding the speculation present would remain in force, meaning implied appearances would be background information, separate from explicit references. ::The issue at hand here is whether or not we should have such articles, or whether to remove them/prohibit them from the site. Currently only two votes have been made. -- Captain MKB 00:31, March 3, 2012 (UTC) :::I have no issue mentioning another franchise as long as there's an actual crossover with Trek, but i would rather see reference like characters remain on the sci-fi franchise's page.--Captain riggs 19:29, March 26, 2012 (UTC) :That's actually another discussion entirely - Darkseid and Jean Grey and many others have their own pages already. I don't think deleting those is in the scope of this discussion. We're only discussing whether we should change our procedure and have a page for the franchise itself. -- Captain MKB 20:50, March 26, 2012 (UTC) Well, it's been three months and the votes are in favour of this page. Assimilation², Issue 1 has now been released and a Doctor Who range exists under a Star Trek umbrella. Would anyone else like to weigh in? -- BadCatMan 06:24, June 3, 2012 (UTC) Admin resolution The page was nominated for deletion for being unsourced (as in the time of pre-release, there were no doctor who comics related to star trek - it hadn't been published yet). the overriding issue, whether or not we should have a precedent for creating another franchise's page, has not been voted on or discussed, since the vote started regarding a different issue. A new discussion is needed, with only the one topic being discussed and voted for consensus. Memory Beta:Pages for deletion/Doctor Who. -- 16:44, June 5, 2012 (UTC)